mpeg-4 - asp or avc

[mousemurder]

mpeg-4 part-2 or part-10
which do you prefer and why ?

i vote for xvid because i get better file sizes with 720x480 at 1000 kbits/s than with x264.

(although x264 gives slightly crisper image quality at the same bitrate.)

[nurbs]

i vote for xvid because i get better file sizes with 720x480 at 1000 kbits/s than with x264.
What do you mean? At the same bitrate you get the same filesize. Unless your xvid encodes generally come out undersized.

[SeeMoreDigital]

mpeg-4 part-7 or part-10
which do you prefer and why ?MPEG-4 SP/ASP conforms to ISO/IEC 14496 Part-2, not Part-7 ;)

[mousemurder]

MPEG-4 SP/ASP conforms to ISO/IEC 14496 Part-2, not Part-7 ;)

^ good catch, fixed.

[J_Darnley]

AVC because of the in-loop filter and improved (IMO) quantiser scale. x264 because of its active development and friendly and hilarious devs.

[mousemurder]

What do you mean? At the same bitrate you get the same filesize. Unless your xvid encodes generally come out undersized.

i only tried once but i got a smaller file with xvid than with x264.
possibly because i selected certain options so its hard to do an apples to apples compare.

i always heard that x264 should yeild smaller sizes as well as better picture quality... but for the one movie i tired i got slightly better picture quality with a bigger file. so i would probably get the same picture quality with xvid if i raise the bitrate or select better crispness/ luma setting and get the same file size (i dont know how to properly tweak avc to get the best output).

[Inspector.Gadget]

AVC, specifically x264. The only reason I would use anything other than the most efficient open-source codec is device compatibility, and I don't own any devices. Easy.

[Dark Shikari]

i vote for xvid because i get better file sizes with 720x480 at 1000 kbits/s than with x264.

Oh, it seems someone has been copying my trolling technique from /g/. :)

[mousemurder]

^ not sure what that means ?

[Gavino]

It means your statement is so nonsensical that it looks like you're deliberately trying to be silly. ;)

For a given video duration, file size is effectively fixed by bit rate, regardless of encoder. It's almost like saying Car X goes faster than Car Y at 100 miles/hr.

[Ajax_Undone]

HA. Its a perfect speed comparison I assure you... X @ 0-100mph In 15sec Compared to Y @ 0-100mph in 20sec. Y is slower lol...:p

Hahahahaaa..:)

~DarC

[Audionut]

You misread "at" as "to".

[mousemurder]

wow its unanimous; i will be using avc from now on. anyone know what parameters will work good (i will probably use h264enc and save the output) ?
It means your statement is so nonsensical that it looks like you're deliberately trying to be silly. ;)

For a given video duration, file size is effectively fixed by bit rate, regardless of encoder. It's almost like saying Car X goes faster than Car Y at 100 miles/hr.

no hard feelings meant; maybe i did something stupid like a 2-pass encode for one and single pass for the other.